Claims on Microsoft’s quantum chip were questioned in a Nature article.

Microsoft’s breakthrough in quantum computing has been questioned by a UK-based physicist in an article published in the science journal Nature.

Dr. Henry Legg, a long-time critic of Microsoft’s quantum work, has argued that the software tool used by the tech giant to test the research has coding errors and is insufficiently accurate.

Legg also said that Microsoft has yet to prove that it has been able to create a theoretical quasi-particle called a majonna that could underpin its approach to quantum computing.

The tech giant has consistently stood by its conclusions despite skepticism from industry experts.

He has invested heavily in the race to build quantum computers, which work differently from traditional machines and are said to have the potential to solve difficult global challenges that are too big for even the world’s most powerful supercomputers to handle.

Quantum computing is already a multi-billion-dollar industry, even though there are currently very limited tools available.

Current quantum machines begin to misbehave when they encounter the slightest perturbation, such as a slight vibration or a slight temperature change.

“Last year, Microsoft said they had built an authentic Swiss watch. But when I opened the case and examined the mechanism, I found what looked like a jumbled mess of mismatched parts,” Legg said.

“Something was making noise, but it didn’t seem like the breakthrough Microsoft was asking for.”

Microsoft stands by the results.

“At the end of the day, success means delivering a scalable quantum computer,” said Dr. Chetan Nayak, technical fellow and corporate vice president, Quantum Hardware, Microsoft.

“Skepticism and rigor are hallmarks of the scientific process, which we appreciate and have received support from a variety of scholars. We have participated in discussions and our deep objections have been accepted and published in Nature.”

In that response, Microsoft said the software in question “did not interpret” the metrics Legg had drawn to his conclusions.

Legg also accused Microsoft of not sharing enough data with other scientists to investigate, which is how scientific research is generally validated or dismissed by the wider professional community.

Microsoft was sharing all the data with the US defense agency DARPA for independent arbitration, but said some were too commercially important to publish widely.

Legg’s paper criticized research published by Microsoft in 2025. After the release of the second generation Majorana chipIt claims to be 1,000 times more reliable than its predecessor.